W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: Futures

From: David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:20:11 +0200
Message-ID: <5175390B.4010003@gmail.com>
To: Kevin Smith <zenparsing@gmail.com>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com>, "Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>, Douglas Crockford <douglas@crockford.com>, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Norbert Lindenberg <w3@norbertlindenberg.com>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
Le 22/04/2013 15:07, Kevin Smith a écrit :
>>     What about using a symbol for the `then` protocol?  Libraries can
>>     be upgraded to use the symbol as an alias for `then`.  It set up
>>     a dependency on ES6, of course...
>     And it doesn't address the compatibility problem people want to
>     address.
> It still does I think.  It's cheap for a library to add a symbol-named 
> alias for `then`.  But it's expensive for a library's clients to 
> replace all usage sites with a different API.  Even though `then` is 
> standard, the other parts are not.
> - Q.defer
> - new jQuery.Deferred
> - new Future
> - ...etc
I see. I guess it's pretty much as much work as wrapping a native future 
for a library promise and vice versa.

Received on Monday, 22 April 2013 13:20:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:12 UTC